Re: the jester
Subject: Re: the jester
From: William Walshe <billywalshe@gmail.com>
Date: 12/2/11, 03:15
To: Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com>

I'm just saying open your mind a little, maybe. Make some moves once in a while just for the sake of bringing attention to these issues, rather than obsessively trying to root out facts for an audience that's largely ignoring you. From here it looks like you're treading water but not getting anywhere. Sure, it's difficult to grab the public's attention, but it's definitely not impossible. I might suggest a few creative ideas, if you weren't so damn combative and paranoid about my intentions. Not that I know anything especially profound about getting publicity, but maybe I do. I bet they'd love to have you as a guest on Coast to Coast AM. That being said, I hope your book deal will bring attention to these issues. Include a bunch of exaggerated  or fabricated details to help sell more books. Stuff like that, you know.

On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 2:59 AM, Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm not sure what you're asking me to do here, exactly. Weren't you arguing that convincing the masses is impossible?


On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 1:48 AM, William Walshe <billywalshe@gmail.com> wrote:
We can argue about whether we prefer the French revolution or the Russian revolution all day long and I'm sure it'd be really interesting, but that's kind of aside the point. We can have our cake and eat it too. Why shouldn't someone inspire the masses to fear this sick surveillance state? In no way would it detract from what you're already doing.


On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 2:29 AM, Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com> wrote:
You remember that time that a small group of people took over Russia despite not being ideologically in accordance with the Russian people? Because I think that, and other examples, goes against your second sentence.


On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 1:23 AM, William Walshe <billywalshe@gmail.com> wrote:
That's ridiculous, Barrett. The attitude that you can make a long-term, meaningful social change without reaching the average person is naive, stupid, and completely unrealistic. Sure, you may make waves in the press or in other undisclosed realms, but what the fuck good does that do? Say, for instance, that these lobbyists you've been harassing at home cave to your pressure and decide to leave Occupy Wall Street alone. Is that going to make America support Occupy Wall Street? Of course not! It may stop the spread of some malicious information, but it's not like it's going to shut Rush Limbaugh up.

Are you seriously going to promote illegal hacks and telephone harassment and then ignore the much more effective tools in use by Fox News and the right? Will you write that off as populist bullshit and pretend like you're somehow above it, while you continue on your quixotic quest to publicize these facts to tiny minorities of people who you believe really "matter?" Seriously, if it's not your cup of tea maybe someone else should lend a hand.

On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 2:02 AM, Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm not trying to convince the masses. I'm not a populist. I'm trying to convince the press and others who matter, and we've gradually had success in doing so. Consider that you may not be privy to all we do if you think that these efforts are wasted.


On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 12:57 AM, William Walshe <billywalshe@gmail.com> wrote:
Oh trust me, I definitely believe in the evils of the intelligence contractors. Plainly, they're up to no good. However, it's hard to draw conclusions from the vague language used in HBGary emails, and you probably wasted way too much effort in that, and it didn't do jack shit for publicity. At best, the public looks at these things in a cursory way, barely paying attention to the facts and making knee-jerk reactions. For instance, this CarrierIQ debacle has gotten enormous attention and it's not nearly as criminal or important as what was revealed in the HBGary leak. It's just scary, and fear is what people react to. Shit, even Aaron Barr's pissed off about CarrierIQ. (WHAT THE FUCK!?!?!!?)

The Jester is definitely the biggest weakness in the argument against Anonymous. Sure, Anonymous uses dirty tactics to promote its ends, but the fact that there's a conservative out there using similar tactics *should* be enormously helpful. He's to Anonymous what Anders Breivik is to militant Islam. I have absolutely no problem feeding that troll all the attention he can get. Going on IRC to somehow reveal his lameness is just not my style. People aren't paying attention to every little detail of this fucker's logical processes. However, making a big dramatic show of anything and everything he does is the best way I can think of to wave a big flag and yell "Hey look at this shitfucker, he's a conservative vigilante who misuses computers!" And that's really what is missing from your struggle against the intelligence contractors. There's no single reprehensible figurehead representing all the underhanded tactics, the contempt for the rule of law, and so on. This is not, of course, a realistic way to look at the world, but it is the way public opinion works. And maybe the Jester's not really our guy, but I am at a loss for a better whipping-boy.

Barrett, I do see you as an incredibly intelligent person. Still, I think you've let your intellect get in the way of your strategy, as you've held the public to unrealistic standards. Getting the facts out there is easy. Convincing the vacillating, childlike masses that it means anything is not so easy.




On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 1:06 AM, barri2009 <barriticus@gmail.com> wrote:
I guess you should see what happens with the legal action. In general, I don't think there's much to be done about him other than using him as an example of the "national security" enemy and their lack of values. See that pastebin "barrett brown vs. The jester except not really" for an example. Better yet, go to irc.2600.net #jester and call him and his associates on their bullshit, log it, and publish it. Overall, though, he's not that great of a problem compared to other things like the intelligence contracting industry and its various aspects, which I don't know if you believe yet or not.
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
From: William Walshe <billywalshe@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 19:12:30 -0500
Subject: the jester

http://th3j35t3r.wordpress.com/2011/11/30/of-trolls-and-lawyers-so-i-thought-i-would-share-this-one/

In this shitty little blog post, Jester accuses the Chronicle - and our fake parent corporation - of fabricating an e-mail from the legal arm of a web hosting company he hit in September. We did no such thing.

I'd really like to see Bluehost tear him a new asshole, as they probably have a damn good case.

Barrett, don't be like the Jester. We're just a comedy web site, and yes, it is sometimes a little dry. I never had the intention of "discrediting" you. I was only making fun. Using other people's names, whether it's yours or the jester's or Adrian Chen's is fucking funny and you do it too. 

But seriously. How can we better publicize the Jester's bounty so people close to him will find out about it and want to turn him in?




--
Regards,

Barrett Brown
512-560-2302




--
Regards,

Barrett Brown
512-560-2302




--
Regards,

Barrett Brown
512-560-2302